Is it possible to have D support built-in in the uppcomming Fedora 7? If so how? Can I help somehow? I would be very happy to see D in the new Fedora distribution... However I fear it is too late because it is in the feature-freeze state now, so I hope it would be possible to add it later on, or so.
I guess Anders built some gcc (with D) RPMs in the past so he would be the right person to ask.
Anders please reply. :)

Dejan Lekic wrote:

> Is it possible to have D support built-in in the uppcomming Fedora 7?

You mean like included in the main Fedora repository ? It could probably
go in "Extras", and since that is being merged with "Core" now it should
be as good as having it "built-in" to the distro, i.e. yum install gdc

When I post the next version at gdcgnu, I'll submit it to Fedora too.

> If so how? Can I help somehow? I would be very happy to see D in the
> new Fedora distribution... However I fear it is too late because it
> is in the feature-freeze state now, so I hope it would be possible to
> add it later on, or so.

The packages have been split lately, to allow for replacing Phobos with
Tango. So that put something of a stick in the wheel, but I haven't
been able to build a D compiler using the system GCC compiler sources.

For Mac I use Apple's GCC and for Win I use MinGW's GCC, but so far it
hasn't been worthwhile to build an Ubuntu-specific or Fedora-specific
version of GDC for GNU/Linux. Much easier to use a vanilla GCC build ?

> I guess Anders built some gcc (with D) RPMs in the past so he would
> be the right person to ask. Anders please reply. :)

I have two separate RPMs for Fedora: one .src.rpm and one .nosrc.rpm.

The first uses the source code, to compile a new GCC with D support.
The second just repackages David's binaries from the dgcc downloads.
I don't think the second variant matches Fedora policies (no source),
but the first one *might* be adopted to their packaging guidelines.
For now, my GDC packaging efforts have been cut back to providing
installers for the official inaries that David already provides....

And that RPM is hosted at the http://gdcgnu.sourceforge.net/ project.
Currently it's a bit old since my build machine wasn't up to it, but
I hope to get it running with "mock" so I can build for all Fedoras.

--anders

Anders, what I would like to have is a replacement of the Fedora's GCC RPM with D language enabled. It would probably be in the gcc-d RPM package...
I dared not to build GCC manually, and replace system's GCC with new one - have you tried it? - If the system is still stable I will most likely do that, and when I have enough time I'll go into hacking the original, Fedora's SPEC file and include support for making a GCC-D package... I have already tried it, but did not put lot of effort in it - there are ~50 patches in that RPM and some D patches collide with those in Fedora's GCC package...
Sure, if I succeed I'll send a post here. :D
Cheers!

Dejan Lekic wrote:

> Anders, what I would like to have is a replacement of the Fedora's
> GCC RPM with D language enabled. It would probably be in the gcc-d
> RPM package...

I had my packages build two: one gdc that was self-contained, and one
gcc-d package that matched the gcc-c++ in that it added to the gcc RPM.
(same software, just different packaging, between the two subpackages)

I usually keep my system "gcc" package installed either way, then maybe
mix it with a "gcc-d" built for the same version of GCC and hope for the
best. (This is what we used to do for Mac OS X, before it was supported)

Or I install the offical "gdc" version, usually helps when bugreporting.

> I dared not to build GCC manually, and replace system's GCC with new
> one - have you tried it? - If the system is still stable I will most
> likely do that, and when I have enough time I'll go into hacking the
> original, Fedora's SPEC file and include support for making a GCC-D
> package... I have already tried it, but did not put lot of effort in
> it - there are ~50 patches in that RPM and some D patches collide
> with those in Fedora's GCC package...

Yes, that's why I didn't use the Fedora-patched system compiler either.
The Ubuntu system compiler is even more fun, think I counted 10k lines
of scripts and patches in the package manager additions for GCC there.

> Sure, if I succeed I'll send a post here. :D Cheers!

My old complex and evolutionized RPM spec:
http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/gdc.spec (builds a complete GCC)

The new (less complex) RPM spec lives at:
http://gdcgnu.sourceforge.net/SPECS/gdc.spec (only does GDC)

--anders

Anders F Björklund wrote:

> Dejan Lekic wrote:
> 
>> Anders, what I would like to have is a replacement of the Fedora's GCC RPM with D language enabled. It would probably be in the gcc-d RPM package...
> 
> I had my packages build two: one gdc that was self-contained, and one gcc-d package that matched the gcc-c++ in that it added to the gcc RPM. (same software, just different packaging, between the two subpackages)
> 
> I usually keep my system "gcc" package installed either way, then maybe mix it with a "gcc-d" built for the same version of GCC and hope for the best. (This is what we used to do for Mac OS X, before it was supported)
> 
> Or I install the offical "gdc" version, usually helps when bugreporting.
> 
>> I dared not to build GCC manually, and replace system's GCC with new one - have you tried it? - If the system is still stable I will most likely do that, and when I have enough time I'll go into hacking the original, Fedora's SPEC file and include support for making a GCC-D package... I have already tried it, but did not put lot of effort in it - there are ~50 patches in that RPM and some D patches collide with those in Fedora's GCC package...
> 
> Yes, that's why I didn't use the Fedora-patched system compiler either. The Ubuntu system compiler is even more fun, think I counted 10k lines of scripts and patches in the package manager additions for GCC there.
> 
>> Sure, if I succeed I'll send a post here. :D Cheers!
> 
> My old complex and evolutionized RPM spec: http://www.algonet.se/~afb/d/gdc.spec (builds a complete GCC)
> 
> The new (less complex) RPM spec lives at:
> http://gdcgnu.sourceforge.net/SPECS/gdc.spec (only does GDC)
> 
> --anders

I'm really looking forward to loosing this: --disable-shared.  I want to build python extensions with PyD, but that can't happen without the ability to build shared objs, which need to be linked with shared D core libs (at least, on x86_64).